Vigilante justice

[JackShephard]

Is it right to punish those who slip through the cracks of the court system? Or is that overstepping boundaries? I'm curious to see what you guys think.

Let's think of a scenario for instance. Someone murders a whole family. The family is innocent and has not done anything to this murderer to logically provoke this attack. Eventually he is arrested and is up for trial. But somehow, a flaw in the court causes him to go free. Lack of evidence perhaps or maybe one of his contacts bribed the judge. Someone who killed a husband, a wife, and their possible children is walking the streets and he could do it again. If you had the chance to remove him from this world without leaving a trace, would you do it? Would you be comfortable with the idea of a vigilante making him pay for his crime? Or is killing wrong no matter what? Would you risk the possible deaths of others in hopes of catching him again and proving that he is guilty?

[HDDH]

Killing would mean violating a human right, one that is almost universally seen as a human right and so killing this man would be wrong - his existence is not the problem, his actions are. As to possible other deaths, no, never, not in a hundred thousand years. If you kill innocent people to catch guilty people, then most people with a working conscience regard that as instinctively wrong, and no further explanation is needed.

[Phazit]

Someone who commits such a brutal crime without any provocation is clearly not right in the head. Whatever his motives, it is his fault, and the fact that people in real life circumstances are slipping free through the legal system makes me sick! I believe that he should be removed from society. I respect human rights and all, but it can be the very reason for improper punishments and justifications for crimes. I think that if they were punished then it would balance the scales once again. I don't understand how people like this can walk free. Without a trace would be even better, so that none of him is left at all. People need to understand that they can be given minor punishments in court if there is a logical and rational motive for the killings, but even then they should not be without retribution for their acts. Therefore, it is right that those who slip through the cracks of the court system are punished.

[Korashk]

The thing with vigilante justice is that things are never as clear as your hypothetical, and if they are people don't get acquitted.

[Short Circuit]

The thing about vigilanties, is that the rumour control section of society, could spread rumours about someone, the vigilanties take revenge, kill him, then it is found out that the person was innocent all along. That is why the justice system has to be seen to be working.

Even justice gets it wrong sometimes:eek:

[ImCoolBeans]

So you're basically asking if any of us agree with the show Dexter?

No, I think the idea of vigilantes going out and killing other criminals is absurd. It defeats the purpose of having a justice system and makes the "vigilante" just as much of a criminal as the murderer is.

[Amnesiac]

Sure, in the heat of the moment an act of vigilante justice may seem moral and even the obvious choice. However, as has been said above, life is never as simple as the hypothetical. Having individuals take their concept of "justice" and letting them force it on whoever they desire is just asking for a disorganized, chaotic society. I hate to use a slippery slope argument, but the rule of law must be upheld when it comes to protecting individual rights.

[Smeagol]

My personal belief is that laws are made to protect people. Yes, a brutal crime should not go unpunished, but if there were vigilantes everywhere, people who didn't deserve to die might also be accidentally killed or killed for no reason but then the killing could be excused because of vigilante justice.

[voicelessjaja]

I agree that this crime should've had some justice, but is you murdered this person, it would be just as wrong. You probably never would know the true story.He could even have been hired?

[JackShephard]

So you're basically asking if any of us agree with the show Dexter?

No, I think the idea of vigilantes going out and killing other criminals is absurd. It defeats the purpose of having a justice system and makes the "vigilante" just as much of a criminal as the murderer is.

If you want to relate it to the show, yes.

Personally I love that show even though I disagree with the sense of justice it portrays. But I was watching another movie recently that made me ask all of you. If anyone has ever seen the Death Note show or movies, it made me wonder how people really felt. It seems that there is answers on both sides.

Let me ask those who support the vigilante, why is it justified to deprive someone of their life based on past actions? What if they change for the better and come to regret their horrible decisions.

And to those who do not support the vigilante, what makes it worth risking another innocent death in hopes of catching this murderer a second time? Why would you let something like that go to chance?

[Rage of the Menace]

Libertarians. Cute. (no i'm not right wing)

People have become too sensitive about what's wrong and right. We're all going to start spanking rapists as a punishment or something.

Because i'm.. unstable though, i base my morals off the Catholic church and i think they believe everyone deserves to live, so i'll stand by that.